Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Hillary Clinton...if she was elected president...
iGrandTheftAuto.com Forums > GTA4.TV/GTA-SanAndreas.com Archive > Old Forum Archive (Read Only) > General > Political & World Issues
Mattay
Hillary was in my town a few weeks ago and I attended. And I must say I was impressed with some of her goals and ambitions, then again I wasn't completely thrilled.

Healthcare would be nice, hey maybe even no national debt. Bringing the troops home is good, if it's done carefully and correctly. But you know then again I don't want a president who says "Look at me I'm a woman and I'm proving to the world I can do something!" I'm not trying to be offensive, but she kind of comes off as that sometimes. Women's rights are great, but she doesn't need to advocate that she's a woman in her campaigning...just that she can do a good job as president.

Also, do you think that she would fight back with enough force if God forbid there was another 9/11?

Again, I'm not trying to be sexist, it's just this is a sensitive topic of Hillary Clinton running for President, and I want to know your opinions.
rocking 2 -apc- 4 ever
I think Bill was great for this country. He put us on the path to fixing the debt problem and many other things...but I don't know if Hilary would be the same way. Some say she ran the show when Bill was in office, but I doubt that to be true.

I really prefer Obama. But I wouldn't mind if Hilary became the pres. Worst comes to worst, she gets impeached and we see that a woman pres really wouldn't be a good thing.
Napoleon.
I'd jump her bones. Schwing!
EDIT:
That is if she still believes in those who still harbor or finance terrorists pay the price glare.gif
Passionate Homo Sapiens Ingester
QUOTE(Mattay @ Dec 18 2007, 03:21 AM) [snapback]1381003[/snapback]
Hillary was in my town a few weeks ago and I attended. And I must say I was impressed with some of her goals and ambitions, then again I wasn't completely thrilled.

Healthcare would be nice, hey maybe even no national debt. Bringing the troops home is good, if it's done carefully and correctly. But you know then again I don't want a president who says "Look at me I'm a woman and I'm proving to the world I can do something!" I'm not trying to be offensive, but she kind of comes off as that sometimes. Women's rights are great, but she doesn't need to advocate that she's a woman in her campaigning...just that she can do a good job as president.

Also, do you think that she would fight back with enough force if God forbid there was another 9/11?

Again, I'm not trying to be sexist, it's just this is a sensitive topic of Hillary Clinton running for President, and I want to know your opinions.
I don't know, your concerns are quite different to mine. Britain's only female leader, Margaret Thatcher, was hardly known for being a soft touch. She strongly and publicly opposed the Soviet Union, fought a popular war against a semi-developed country, and generally went overboard on people who didn't deserve it domestically.

For whatever psychological reason, it seems only the most virulent women can make it as leaders, most notably the Rt Hon Ms Thatcher and Golda Meir.

That said, Hilary seems an altogether more liberal proposition, though I do fear she might pander to the evangelists.
Mattay
Well said. Using Margaret Thatcher was a good example, as like you said she was a stern leader. Then again I think that Hillary might not be as stern...a good leader, possibly, but she just doesn't come off as a respect-demanding woman, but I may be wrong.
Amis
Anyone else could take better care of USA than Bush, even I, even if I'm not even american, but you know it's true. As what comes to Hillary Clinton, I think she would be just fine president, give her a chance.
Ex-PS Fanboy
QUOTE(Amis @ Dec 18 2007, 08:19 PM) [snapback]1381143[/snapback]
Anyone else could take better care of USA than Bush, even I, even if I'm not even american, but you know it's true. As what comes to Hillary Clinton, I think she would be just fine president, give her a chance.


quote my friend rachel "i think a monkey could run things better than bush"
Hardcore Ottoman
Wow... can we please get off that bandwagon now?^

I don't believe any of the success of the Clintons is attributed to them personally but rather their administration who they were smart enough to leave alone. That administration was near the same the people from Reagan--this guy did a lot more than you think.
rocking 2 -apc- 4 ever
Which guy? Reagan or Bush?

I know Reagan did a lot. He was a pretty damn good pres.
Mattay
I think Bill Clinton was one of the best Presidents the nation had ever seen. Hillary and him did work as a team and produced a myriad of good results. Maybe she would do good in office, provided that her husband lead by her side.
rocking 2 -apc- 4 ever
^True...

I think they work well together...
Qdeathstar
Oh. You guys are soo l33t. Bush Sucks YAYAYAYA. Give it a fucking rest already.



Hillary Clinton would be an OK leader, but she wouldn't be great. She be constantly living and leading under the shadow of Bill Clinton, and lets face it, the only reason she even has a shot at this whole thing is because of her "Clinton" name, exactly why the current president had a shot at it back in 2000. I don't see how her ability to stand out as a leader differs at all from the current presidents, and i don't think that if she had of been leader in 2001 the outcome would have been better.

Secondly, she is soft on illegal immigration and wants to socialize medicare... I mean, i'm a moderate on illegal immigration but not being able to answer whether or not illegal immigrants should be required to speak English or obtain drivers licenses this late into her political career is a bit of a joke.


The main cards she has to play are: She's a woman, She's a Democrat, and Anyone's Better than Bush (and those evil republicans). And since we live in a headline world, thats most likely all she'll need.
rocking 2 -apc- 4 ever
I agree. Hilary would be good, but not the greatest...although she might not even get a chance because she isn't leading in the primaries, Obama is.
Amis
I'd go for Obama too, as I have stated in other topics. But Clinton could do some nice stuff too, since she has to proven herself as a leader, then she is forced to create some awesome shit out of nowhere, like almost curing the cancer or something. And it is stone age thinking that just becouse she is a woman, she can't be president.

Like in my country we selected a woman as president, twice in a row. And we had very small time prime minister and president both women in the same time. So yes, women can do more than just BJs, prejudgement rarely is a good thing.

And don't think her as "another Clinton" just think her as you think any other candidate. And vote, remember to vote. If you don't vote then also don't whine about the result. Use your first amendment or whatever it is, the freedom to elect your officials.
Passionate Homo Sapiens Ingester
QUOTE(punxtr @ Dec 19 2007, 01:29 AM) [snapback]1381245[/snapback]
Wow... can we please get off that bandwagon now?^

I don't believe any of the success of the Clintons is attributed to them personally but rather their administration who they were smart enough to leave alone. That administration was near the same the people from Reagan--this guy did a lot more than you think.
True though that may be, Clinton was an exceptionally intelligent man and a good diplomat.


QUOTE(Qdeathstar @ Dec 19 2007, 04:22 AM) [snapback]1381298[/snapback]
Oh. You guys are soo l33t. Bush Sucks YAYAYAYA. Give it a fucking rest already.



Hillary Clinton would be an OK leader, but she wouldn't be great. She be constantly living and leading under the shadow of Bill Clinton, and lets face it, the only reason she even has a shot at this whole thing is because of her "Clinton" name, exactly why the current president had a shot at it back in 2000. I don't see how her ability to stand out as a leader differs at all from the current presidents, and i don't think that if she had of been leader in 2001 the outcome would have been better.
You know, it might be better for the world if the US had an OK leader for a change. Bush got in, and has stayed in, by pandering to old world perceptions of what makes a Great Leader. Whatever way you spin it, that has not gone well.

I also disagree that being set in your ways and stubborn in your opinions (Re: immigration) is necessarily a good thing. Though she really ought to have some kind of view by now, I agree, but it's no worse than having an opinion that a lot of people disagree with. Even if it is more cynical.

Whatever happens, I just hope Americans think of her as her own person, rather than a composite creation borne of her gender and her husband.
Mattay
I agree with QD, she would never have been this popular without her name.

And immigration was one of the things that turned me way off to her. I do believe that immigration is great, but if an alien comes to the U.S., they should AT LEAST know the English language. And I mean read, write, speak, understand.

Personally, I'd probably vote for Bill Richardson.
rocking 2 -apc- 4 ever
The language thing is the only part of immigration that I mind...if we go to their countries, we have to speak their languages...

So if you come here, speak ours
Qdeathstar
QUOTE

You know, it might be better for the world if the US had an OK leader for a change.
Maybe, but Mc Cain would certainly be a more OK leader.


QUOTE

Bush got in, and has stayed in, by pandering to old world perceptions of what makes a Great Leader. Whatever way you spin it, that has not gone well.


Bush got in because of his name, so will Clinton.

QUOTE

I also disagree that being set in your ways and stubborn in your opinions (Re: immigration) is necessarily a good thing. Though she really ought to have some kind of view by now, I agree, but it's no worse than having an opinion that a lot of people disagree with. Even if it is more cynical.
I didn't accuse her of flip-flopping, i accused her of not being clear on her position.

Me personally, I'm fine with illegal immigrants working here, I'm fine with illegal immigrants who have been in the country obtaining legal status, I'm fine with them receiving liscenses, I'm fine with all that. I'm not fine with our government giving them rights and benefits that are only guaranteed to United States Citizens. I'm not fine with easy the standards for becoming an American, and I'm not fine with merely deporting illegal-alien criminals (which is what we often do now, to maintain good relations with our third-world brother, Mexico).

Not having an opinion isn't cynical..

QUOTE

Whatever happens, I just hope Americans think of her as her own person, rather than a composite creation borne of her gender and her husband.


Well, once she stops playing those cards, perhaps people will. But, thats what her campaign wants the Americans to think about her. She always plays up the fact that she is a woman, and always has President Clinton campaigning for her.
Indy
I hate to sound like a sexist fag, but I fear a women running the most powerful country in the world. Then again, there have been many powerful female characters throughout history.
rocking 2 -apc- 4 ever
^Your not being sexist...just a man...it kinda makes me wonder too...

Thankfully shes hit menopause (I think she is that old)...
Hardcore Ottoman
... I feel she has no integrity to her name. She stayed with Bill until after his term so that the nation didn't have to go through any more drama; but, she never divorced afterwards... and now she is whoring a man who got sucked off by a whore--two, actually.

So, she has no moral integrity and self-esteem and she is an opportunist in matters such as a popularity contest for the presidency. No need to read her platform, I wouldn't want her in my front yard just for who she is.
rocking 2 -apc- 4 ever
^ You took the words straight from my mouth...she is like Giuliani...
Hardcore Ottoman
Now I'm not acquainted with Guiliani, so, if you may, please elaborate and corroborate. I don't know of anything like Rodham's to Guiliani.
Passionate Homo Sapiens Ingester
Mattay: "Aliens", how englightened.

QD:I'm sure she has an opinion. I'm just not sure she had considered its relative popularity until then, and so didn't say it. Which is definitely cynical. As is most of her campaign...

punxtr: You seem to disagree with the idea that the election might be a shallow popularity contest. But at the same time you write off Clinton for personal reasons. That's surely quite a visible disconnect.
42yearoldinvestmentbanka
Hilary Clinton is the true anti Christ if she is elected president due to the idiots that will vote for her the US is in deep s__t. Canada might be home for me if that poor excuse for a human is elected.
PS forget about driving cars we will be back to horse and buggy because Clinton who knows nothing about the automotive industry wants 50mpg standard its one thing to say this to the voters to get votes but there is no chance in hell to have this possible in the time frame she stated.
Hardcore Ottoman
QUOTE(mello_yello @ Dec 21 2007, 09:48 AM) [snapback]1381777[/snapback]
punxtr: You seem to disagree with the idea that the election might be a shallow popularity contest. But at the same time you write off Clinton for personal reasons. That's surely quite a visible disconnect.

I'm referring to her popularity contest in the race. Sometimes I do feel that way about primaries but in the end I'll still vote for someone so I don't talk about it much.

Maybe my attitude rubbed off there. Honestly, there is only one thing I was changed in the process of primaries and I'll PM it too you. I think I still have my old essay (no matter how disjointed it is...).
rocking 2 -apc- 4 ever
QUOTE(punxtr @ Dec 20 2007, 11:54 PM) [snapback]1381701[/snapback]
Now I'm not acquainted with Guiliani, so, if you may, please elaborate and corroborate. I don't know of anything like Rodham's to Guiliani.


Well Guiliani is a Republican. And one of their platforms is usually moral values. Yet he is divorced and has admitted to using NYC tax payers money to take his affairs out on date and used city and state vehicles to transport them...where is the morality there?

So I believe that he isn't trustworthy...
Hardcore Ottoman
That is, if you vote Republican. I'm trying to be completely partial on him because I naturally want to like an Italian in office. But doing so would undermine my ethos big time.
Qdeathstar
QUOTE(mello_yello @ Dec 21 2007, 02:48 PM) [snapback]1381777[/snapback]
QD:I'm sure she has an opinion. I'm just not sure she had considered its relative popularity until then, and so didn't say it. Which is definitely cynical. As is most of her campaign...


Well, she hasn't stated a clear position regarding her position on illegal immigration, therefore on must think she is still trying to decided which position will make her look most electable. Now, if she's doing that for this issue, imagine how many simpler issues she has done the same thing on. Boo.

QUOTE(punxtr @ Dec 22 2007, 02:49 AM) [snapback]1381977[/snapback]
That is, if you vote Republican. I'm trying to be completely partial on him because I naturally want to like an Italian in office. But doing so would undermine my ethos big time.


Yeah, i would vote Hillary before i'd vote Guilliano... He's slimy and i can't trust him...
rocking 2 -apc- 4 ever
^Very slimy...I don't even think NY should've trusted him to be the mayor of NYC anyway.
Mattay
Well among other issues I was watching a debate this morning on Fox News to see that Hillary had flip-flopped her decision on the Iraq war. I don't remember if she had supported it up until she entered the race or if she supported it up until the fall of Hussein or whatever.

But anyway she did vote for the authorization of president Bush using military action against Iraq. And now she has a plan that would get the military out of Iraq as soon as possible.

rocking 2 -apc- 4 ever
^Good to know. Now I won't vote for her.

I knew she voted to go to war and it has been "rumored" that she was now against it...but now that she's come out and said it, she has openly admitted she is a hypocrite.

Thank you Mattay.
Hardcore Ottoman
I should let you here know that I know at least two Marines and one Navy enlistee who hate those against the war. These people have been to combat and love going back for another tour because it is something they are good at and it has a purpose that makes more sense than most of the liberal/trade jobs in the mother country (not the Liberal party, mind you).

Those who are against the war are running out of shit to spit out when they say oil, bla blah... our oil crisis hasn't gotten any better since occupation. This is not Vietnam2 either as America right now under its possible and current administration and leaders don't plan on leaving the Middle East after all of its effort. Even those that want to pull out won't fully pull out.

So that calls to wonder what exactly the long term goal is in the Middle East as it truly isn't so painfully honest as a lot of people belive. That's what's bugging me... but reason tells me trade and I feel that is more believable than simply oil.
rocking 2 -apc- 4 ever
QUOTE(punxtr @ Dec 22 2007, 08:10 PM) [snapback]1382206[/snapback]
I should let you here know that I know at least two Marines and one Navy enlistee who hate those against the war. These people have been to combat and love going back for another tour because it is something they are good at and it has a purpose that makes more sense than most of the liberal/trade jobs in the mother country (not the Liberal party, mind you).

Those who are against the war are running out of shit to spit out when they say oil, bla blah... our oil crisis hasn't gotten any better since occupation. This is not Vietnam2 either as America right now under its possible and current administration and leaders don't plan on leaving the Middle East after all of its effort. Even those that want to pull out won't fully pull out.

So that calls to wonder what exactly the long term goal is in the Middle East as it truly isn't so painfully honest as a lot of people belive. That's what's bugging me... but reason tells me trade and I feel that is more believable than simply oil.


I totally support the war and all of the fine soldiers who put their live on the line, but not someone who goes from support to realizing her choice has hurt her chances at becoming president and then changes her stance. The actually long-term goal does make me wonder...but who knows with the cracky American government.

jdid112
Umm... think, think.

What do you call those kind of presidents?

You know the ones who promise the crowd whatever they want to that they'll win, then after they win, they do something totally opposite like pay 12049 billion for a pie organization...

What was it, think think...
rocking 2 -apc- 4 ever
^Umm. They are called "mostly every president ever."

Or plainly, hypocrites.
Hardcore Ottoman
Only good presidents make it in by accident (e.g. Teddy Roosevelt).
Qdeathstar
Right.... Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Reagan, Nixon... all accidents :-/ rite.
rocking 2 -apc- 4 ever
QUOTE(Qdeathstar @ Dec 24 2007, 02:11 AM) [snapback]1382551[/snapback]
Right.... Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Reagan, Nixon... all accidents :-/ rite.


^The few good presidents...
Hardcore Ottoman
QUOTE(Qdeathstar @ Dec 24 2007, 02:11 AM) [snapback]1382551[/snapback]
Right.... Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Reagan, Nixon... all accidents :-/ rite.

I would say Lincoln, Teddy, and Reagan are the only good presidents after the age of Jackson. Thenafter it wasn't quite what Washington envisioned... he didn't envision political parties factions either--he was against them. Tell me the "invisible hand" of primary elections will always pick the right candidate... no system is perfect my friend.
Qdeathstar
QUOTE(punxtr @ Dec 25 2007, 04:25 AM) [snapback]1382728[/snapback]
QUOTE(Qdeathstar @ Dec 24 2007, 02:11 AM) [snapback]1382551[/snapback]
Right.... Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Reagan, Nixon... all accidents :-/ rite.

I would say Lincoln, Teddy, and Reagan are the only good presidents after the age of Jackson. Thenafter it wasn't quite what Washington envisioned... he didn't envision political parties factions either--he was against them. Tell me the "invisible hand" of primary elections will always pick the right candidate... no system is perfect my friend.


washington wasn't the foundation of American Political thought... Jefferson was.

Secondly, it doesn't matter whether not the political system is exactly the way Jefferson intended, a good president is still a good president...
Hardcore Ottoman
QUOTE(Qdeathstar @ Dec 25 2007, 06:20 PM) [snapback]1382811[/snapback]
QUOTE(punxtr @ Dec 25 2007, 04:25 AM) [snapback]1382728[/snapback]
QUOTE(Qdeathstar @ Dec 24 2007, 02:11 AM) [snapback]1382551[/snapback]
Right.... Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Reagan, Nixon... all accidents :-/ rite.

I would say Lincoln, Teddy, and Reagan are the only good presidents after the age of Jackson. Thenafter it wasn't quite what Washington envisioned... he didn't envision political parties factions either--he was against them. Tell me the "invisible hand" of primary elections will always pick the right candidate... no system is perfect my friend.


washington wasn't the foundation of American Political thought... Jefferson was.

Secondly, it doesn't matter whether not the political system is exactly the way Jefferson intended, a good president is still a good president...

No shit sherlock. Washington was against it (rudimentary signs of political parties amounting to useless bickering and bloody-shirt waving) because at the time there was a formation of split interests into two groups known as Federalists and Democratic Republicans. Hamilton is exemplified by the Federalists for his interests in trade with Great Britain (which most of the New England states citizens hated with a passion) and the D/R's (Jefferson) who basically were simply against anything British. Washington warned against those kinds of factions in his Farewell but today is resonates further with the hurt the two-party system is doing to the USA.

But, on your second point, it wasn't Jefferson's ideal system that an intelligent populace would gravitate towards the more effective leader--all he wanted was his isolationist, states' rights agrarian republic. That system never even showed signs of implementation. But this is getting off-subject. What does this have to do with good presidents? Good presidents are those well-rounded individuals that are more decisive yet restrained in their position in government. FDR does not stand good in my book because he took his New Deal to a whole new level--eventually failing after he tried rigging the Supreme Court with partial judges--and afterward not much was done to return the nation back to its rugged individualism once it was prospering again.

We probably don't have "good" presidents anymore because not only do that have to much influence--they have too much responsibility and that added weight is causing presidents to lose focus of their original agenda.
Jesant13
QUOTE(rocking 2 -apc- 4 ever @ Dec 17 2007, 10:32 PM) [snapback]1381006[/snapback]
I think Bill was great for this country. He put us on the path to fixing the debt problem and many other things...but I don't know if Hilary would be the same way. Some say she ran the show when Bill was in office, but I doubt that to be true.

I really prefer Obama. But I wouldn't mind if Hilary became the pres. Worst comes to worst, she gets impeached and we see that a woman pres really wouldn't be a good thing.


I too prefer Obama and wouldn't mind if Hillary became president. So far, it looks like this is going to be a close election between the two.
Loly Pop
alot of questions i have

Why is it, that every parent i talk too all think that Barack Obama is really a Muslim, he just wants people to think he is christian? is that not the dumbest thing you've ever heard? why the fuck will people try to tell him what he is, when it's his fuckin life....like people can't just take his word for it. Is he Muslim b/c he is apart of the TUCC Church in Chicago?

Why do they have 1 against 1? Why can't they have, in my opinion, McCain, Obama, Clinton, and Huckabee, all running at the same time....i might be answering my own question but is it because voting turnout would go down and the fact that some low percentage people would actually vote for them?


because my history teacher pointed out when Bush was elected...half the people in the country voted....and 50 or something of those people voted for him....so when you think about it...only 25% of the country actually has been known to approve of Bush
Juice
QUOTE(Loly Pop @ Jan 13 2008, 05:03 PM) [snapback]1386277[/snapback]
Why is it, that every parent i talk too all think that Barack Obama is really a Muslim, he just wants people to think he is christian? is that not the dumbest thing you've ever heard? why the fuck will people try to tell him what he is, when it's his fuckin life....like people can't just take his word for it. Is he Muslim b/c he is apart of the TUCC Church in Chicago?

Obama was a Muslim. He's trying to downplay his Islamic roots. But that's perfectly understandable given the political landscape at the moment. Christians are afraid of everything, especially Black Muslims. And let's not get started on how much AIPAC wouldn't have it.
Loly Pop
OBama went to a Muslim, just like he went to a catholic school..

Many people went to the Muslim school: all different ethnicities and religious influences...that doesn't make him Muslim..

I'm Baptist but just because i go to a Church of Christ church sometimes doesn't make the that denomination...and that is gay when people like you try to attach that to him just like all the parents.

He is as much athiest as he is Muslim from what a read...if fact, more atheist than Muslim b/c his dad was Muslim and left them for Kenya, and his mom was athiest....
Qdeathstar
QUOTE(Loly Pop @ Jan 13 2008, 10:03 PM) [snapback]1386277[/snapback]
alot of questions i have

Why is it, that every parent i talk too all think that Barack Obama is really a Muslim, he just wants people to think he is christian? is that not the dumbest thing you've ever heard? why the fuck will people try to tell him what he is, when it's his fuckin life....like people can't just take his word for it. Is he Muslim b/c he is apart of the TUCC Church in Chicago?


the media stirs it up because its "intertaining" and people care because the majority of America is religious...

QUOTE

Why do they have 1 against 1? Why can't they have, in my opinion, McCain, Obama, Clinton, and Huckabee, all running at the same time....i might be answering my own question but is it because voting turnout would go down and the fact that some low percentage people would actually vote for them?
Its not one against one.. its everyone in the democratic party running for president against everyone else in the democratic party running for president, and then everyone in the republican party running for president against everyone else in the republican party running for president..

The top three democratic presidential candidates are Edwards, Clinton, and Obama. The top three republican presidential candidates are Mc Cain, Huckabee, and Romney.

The reason the two parties are kept separate is because these aren't elections sanctioned by the government, rather they are meetings by the two major political parties, who as a party choose which candidate they want to represent there perspective party in the presidential elections.

So far, Clinton has won 2 primaries and Obama has one 1 primary on the democratic side. On the republican side, McCain, Romney, and Huckabee have each won one primary.

QUOTE

because my history teacher pointed out when Bush was elected...half the people in the country voted....and 50 or something of those people voted for him....so when you think about it...only 25% of the country actually has been known to approve of Bush


Your teacher is an idiot and should be shot. It's none of his business to insert his own political views into a highschool classroom. You should complain to your principle.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...-2005Jan14.html

Even if the other 40% didn't vote, it doesn't mean that all of them disapproved of President Bush. Infact, the Yay and Nays for people who didn't vote would probably have the same proportion as the people who did vote...
better
SI don't no what will she do or what will not.But knows only one thing she seems to be quite sincere person for the post of president.
PapaBearDX
Although I've supported Obama since the beginning I'm starting to favor Hillary's health care plan.
Don Leone
It's rather unfair that she's used her husband to get where she is today. Like the Bush's, the Clintons could become the next 'royal family' of the USA.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2014 Invision Power Services, Inc.